Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Information
For information concerning PCT member countries, see the notice
appearing in the Official Gazette at 1350 O.G. 73, on January 12, 2010
For information on subject matter under Rule 39 that a particular
International Searching Authority will not search, see Annex D of the PCT
Applicants' Guide.
European Patent Office as Searching and Examining Authority
The European Patent Office (EPO) may act as the International Searching
Authority (ISA) for an international application filed with the United
States Receiving Office or the International Bureau (IB) as Receiving
Office where at least one of the applicants is either a national or
resident of the United States of America. However, the EPO is no longer
a competent ISA, within the meaning of PCT Article 16(3), for
international applications filed by U.S. residents or nationals on or
after March 1, 2002, in the USPTO or IB as a Receiving Office, and where
the application contains one or more claims directed to the field of
business methods. For the definition of what the EPO considers to be
precluded subject matter in the field of business methods, applicants
should see the "Notice from the President of the European Patent
Office", dated November 26, 2001, and which was published as Annex A in
the "Notice Concerning EPO Competence to Act as PCT Authority" in
the Official Gazette at 1255 O.G. 878, on February 19, 2002.
The European Patent Office may act as the International Preliminary
Examining Authority (IPEA) for an international application filed in the
United States Receiving Office or the International Bureau as Receiving
Office where at least one of the applicants is either a national or
resident of the United States of America, provided that the European
Patent Office acted as the International Searching Authority. However,
the EPO is no longer a competent IPEA, within the meaning of PCT Article
32(3), for international applications filed by U.S. residents or nationals
in the USPTO or IB as a Receiving Office where the corresponding demand is
filed with the EPO on or after March 1, 2002, and where the application
contains one or more claims directed to the field of business methods.
The search fee of the European Patent Office was increased, effective
January 1, 2011, and was announced in the Official Gazette at 1361 O.G.
180, on December 28, 2010.
Korean Intellectual Property Office as Searching and Examining Authority
For use of the Korean Intellectual Property Office as an International
Searching Authority and International Preliminary Examining Authority for
international applications filed in the United States Receiving Office,
see the notice appearing in the Official Gazette at 1302 O.G. 1261 on
January 17, 2006.
The search fee of the Korean Intellectual Property Office was increased,
effective January 1, 2011, and was announced in the Official Gazette at
1361 O.G. 180, on December 28, 2010.
Australian Patent Office as Searching and Examining Authority
The Australian Patent Office (IP Australia) may act as the International
Searching Authority (ISA) for an international application filed with the
United States Receiving Office or the International Bureau (IB) as
Receiving Office where at least one of the applicants is either a national
or resident of the United States of America. However, IP Australia is not a
competent ISA, within the meaning of PCT Artical 16(3), for international
applications filed by U.S. residents or nationals in the USPTO or IB as a
Receiving Office, and where the application contains one or more claims

August 16, 2011

US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

1369 OG 123

directed to the field of business methods or mechanical inventions.
IP Australia may act as the International Preliminary Examining
Authority (IPEA) for an international application filed in the United
States Receiving Office or the International Bureau as Receiving Office
where at least one of the applicants is either a national or resident of
the United States of America, provided that IP Australia acted as the
International Searching Authority. However, IP Australia is not a competent
IPEA, within the meaning of PCT Article 32(3), for international
applications filed by U.S. residents or nationals in the USPTO or IB as a
Receiving Office where the corresponding demand is filed with IP Australia
and where the application contains one or more claims directed to the
fields of business methods or mechanical engineering or analogous fields of
technology as defined by specified areas of the International Patent
Classification System, as indicated in Annex A to the agreement between the
USPTO and IP Australia. See the notice appearing in the Official Gazette
at 1337 O.G. 261 on December 23, 2008.
For use of IP Australia as an International Searching Authority and
International Preliminary Examining Authority for international
applications filed in the United States Receiving Office, see the notice
appearing in the Official Gazette at 1337 O.G. 265 on December 23, 2008.
The search fee of IP Australia was increased, effective January 1, 2011,
and was announced in the Official Gazette at 1361 O.G. 180, on December 28,
2010.
Fees
The transmittal fee and search fees for the USPTO were changed,
effective January 12, 2009, and were announced in the Federal Register on
November 12, 2008. The fee for filing a request for the restoration of the
right of priority was established, effective November 9, 2007, and was
announced in the Federal Register on September 10, 2007.
International filing fees were increased, effective November 1, 2010, and
were announced in the Official Gazette at 1360 O.G. 5, on November 2, 2010.
The schedule of PCT fees (in U.S. dollars), as of January 1, 2011, is
as follows:
International Application (PCT Chapter I) fees:
Transmittal fee $240.00
Search fee
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) as
International Searching Authority (ISA)
- Search fee $2,080.00
- Supplemental search fee, per additional
invention (payable only upon invitation) $2,080.00
European Patent Office as ISA $2,443.00
Korean Intellectual Property Office as ISA
- for international applications filed in English $1,157.00
IP Australia as ISA $1,837.00
International fees
International filing fee $1,367.00
International filing fee-filed in paper
with PCT EASY zip file or
electronically without PCT EASY zip file $1,264.00

August 16, 2011

US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

1369 OG 124

International filing fee-filed
electronically with PCT EASY zip files $1,161.00
Supplemental fee for each page over 30 $15.00
Restoration of Priority
Filing a request for the restoration of the
right of priority under § 1.452 $1,410.00
International Application (PCT Chapter II) fees associated
with filing a Demand for Preliminary Examination:
Handling fee $206.00
Handling fee-90% reduction, if applicants meet criteria
specified at:
http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/fees/fee_reduction.pdf $20.60
Preliminary Examination Fee
USPTO as International Preliminary
Examining Authority (IPEA)
- USPTO was ISA in PCT Chapter I $600.00
- USPTO was not ISA in PCT Chapter I $750.00
- Additional preliminary examination fee,
per additional invention
(payable only upon invitation) $600.00
U.S. National Stage fees (for international applications entering
the U.S. national phase under 35 U.S.C. 371) can be found on the USPTO's
Web site (www.uspto.gov).
December 13, 2010 ROBERT W. BAHR
Acting Associate Commissioner
for Patent Examination Policy
United States Patent and Trademark Office

Notice of Maintenance Fees Payable
Title 37 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 1.362(d) provides
that maintenance fees may be paid without surcharge for the six-month
period beginning 3, 7, and 11 years after the date of issue of patents
based on applications filed on or after Dec. 12, 1980. An additional
six-month grace period is provided by 35 U.S.C. 41(b) and 37 CFR 1.362(e)
for payment of the maintenance fee with the surcharge set forth in 37 CFR
1.20(h), as amended effective Dec. 16, 1991. If the maintenance fee is
not paid in the patent requiring such payment the patent will expire on
the 4th, 8th, or 12th anniversary of the grant.
Attention is drawn to the patents that were issued on August 5, 2008
for which maintenance fees due at 3 years and six months may now be paid
The patents have patent numbers within the following ranges:
Utility Patents 7,406,718 through 7,409,722
Reissue Patents based on the above identified patents.
Attention is drawn to the patents that were issued on August 3, 2004
for which maintenance fees due at 7 years and six months may now be paid
The patents have patent numbers within the following ranges:
Utility Patents 6,769,134 through 6,772,438
Reissue Patents based on the above identified patents.
Attention is drawn to the patents that were issued on August 1, 2000
for which maintenance fees due at 11 years and six months may now be paid.
The patents have patent numbers within the following ranges:
Utility Patents 6,094,742 through 6,098,195
Reissue Patents based on the above identified patents.
No maintenance fees are required for design or plant patents.
Payments of maintenance fees in patents may be submitted electronically
over the Internet at www.uspto.gov. Click on the "Site Index" link at the
top of the homepage (www.uspto.gov), and then scroll down and click on the
"Maintenance Fees" link for more information.
Payments of maintenance fees in patents not submitted electronically
over the Internet should be mailed to "United States Patent and Trademark
Office, P.O. Box 979070, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000".
Correspondence related to maintenance fees other than payments of
maintenance fees in patents is not to be mailed to P.O. Box 979070,
St. Louis, MO 63197-9000, but must be mailed to "Mail Stop M
Correspondence, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O.
Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450".
Patent owners must establish small entity status according to 37 CFR
1.27 if they have not done so and if they wish to pay the small entity
amount.
The current amounts of the maintenance fees due at 3 years and six
months, 7 years and six months, and 11 years and six months are set forth
in the most recently amended provisions in 37 CFR 1.20(e)-(g). To obtain
the current maintenance fee amounts, please call the USPTO Contact Center
at (800)-786-9199 or see the current USPTO fee schedule posted on the USPTO
Internet web site. At the top of the USPTO homepage at www.uspto.gov, click
on the "Site Index" link and then scroll down and click on the "Fees,
USPTO" link to find the current USPTO fee schedule.

Service by Publication
A petition to cancel the registration identified below having been
filed, and the notice of such proceeding sent to registrant at the last
known address having been returned by the Postal Service as undeliverable,
notice is hereby given that unless the registrant listed herein, its
assigns or legal representatives, shall enter an appearance within thirty
days of this publication, the cancellation will proceed as in the case of
default.
Cardiac Telecom Corporation, Greensburg, PA, Registration No. 2993543 for
the mark "HEARTLINK", Cancellation No. 92054051.
ROCHELLE ADAMS
Paralegal
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, for
DEBORAH S. COHN
Commissioner for Trademarks
Service by Publication
A notice of opposition to the registration of the mark in the
application identified below having been filed, and the notice of such
proceeding sent to applicant at the last known address having been returned
by the Postal Service as undeliverable, notice is hereby given that unless
the applicant listed herein, its assigns or legal representatives, shall
enter an appearance within thirty days of this publication, the opposition
will proceed as in the case of default.
Meridian Sales, LLC, Tarzana, CA, Application Serial No. 77593211 for the
mark "HOLLYWOOD STATE UNIVERSITY", Opposition No. 91199173.
KARL KOCHERSPERGER
Paralegal Specialist
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, for
DEBORAH S. COHN
Commissioner for Trademarks
Service by Publication
A petition to cancel the registration identified below having been
filed, and the notice of such proceeding sent to registrant at the last
known address having been returned by the Postal Service as undeliverable,
notice is hereby given that unless the registrant listed herein, its
assigns or legal representatives, shall enter an appearance within thirty
days of this publication, the cancellation will proceed as in the case of
default.
AYA LLC, New York, New York, Registration No. 3165861 for the mark "AYA",
Cancellation No. 92054143.
KARL KOCHERSPERGER
Paralegal Specialist
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, for
DEBORAH S. COHN
Commissioner for Trademarks

37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication
Notice is hereby given of the filing of an application with a petition
under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application without the
signature of all inventors. The petition has been granted. A notice has
been sent to the last known address of the non-signing inventor. The
inventor whose signature is missing (Fukashi MURAI) may join in the
application by promptly filing an appropriate oath or declaration complying
with 37 CFR 1.63. The international application number is PCT/J2009/054823
and was filed 03 June 2009 in the names of Fukashi MURAI and Michinori
KOHARA for the invention entitled RECOMBINANT VACCINIA VIRUS HAVING
HEPATITIS C VIRUS GENE. The national stage application number is 12/736,079
and has a 35 U.S.C. 371(c)(1), (c)(2) and (c)(4) date of 02 February 2011.
37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication
Notice is hereby given of the filing of an application with a petition
under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application without the
signature of one of the joint inventors. The petition has been granted. A
notice has been sent to the last known address of the non-signing inventor.
The inventor whose signature is missing (Philip Chermak) may join in the
application by promptly filing an appropriate oath or declaration complying
with 37 CFR 1.63. The international application number is PCT/US09/51405
and was filed on 22 July 2009 in the name of SKINNER et al for the
invention entitled "MOTOR ARRANGEMENT FOR WINDOW COVERINGS". The national
stage application number is 13/054,359 and has a date of 14 January 2001
under 35 U.S.C. 371(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(4).
37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication
Notice is hereby given of the filing of an application with a petition
under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application without the
signature of all inventors. The petition has been granted. A notice has
been sent to the last known address of the non-signing inventor. The
inventor whose signature is missing (Baudoin Mertens) may join in the
application by promptly filing an appropriate oath or declaration complying
with 37 CFR 1.63. The international application number is PCT/US2009/045151
and was filed on 26 May 2009 in the names of Myriam MONDIN, Didier DORMAL,
Frederic BESSEMANS, Jean MASSAUX, and Baudoin MERTENS for the invention
entitled Liquid Cleaning Compositions And Methods. The national stage
application number is 12/522,971 and has a 35 U.S.C. 371(c)(1), (c)(2), and
(c)(4) date of 31 January 2011.
37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication
Notice is hereby given of the filing of an application with a petition
under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application without the
signature of the inventor. The petition has been granted. A notice has
been sent to the last known address of each non-signing inventor. The
inventor whose signature is missing (David Heather) may join in the
application by promptly filing an appropriate oath or declaration complying
with 37 CFR 1.63. The international application number is PCT/GB2008/000809
and was filed on 07 March 2008, in the name of David Heather for the
invention entitled CONNECTOR SYSTEM FOR BUILDING MODULES. The national
stage application number is 12/530,360 and has a date under 35 U.S.C.
§371(c)(1), (c)(2) and (c)(4) of 18 August 2010.
37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication
Notice is hereby given of the filing of an application with a petition
under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application without the
signature of all the inventors. The petition has been granted. A notice
has been sent to the last known addresses of the non-signing inventors
(Takeshi SHIRATO and Yuuji HONDA). The inventors whose signatures are
missing may join in the application by promptly filing an appropriate oath

August 16, 2011

US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

1369 OG 164

or declaration complying with 37 CFR 1.63. The international application
number is PCT/JP2008/073288 and was filed 22 December 2008 in the names of
Takeshi SHIRATO, Yuuji HONDA, Hiroshi SATO, and Masamichi OSAWA for the
invention entitled FILMING TREATMENT JIG, PLASMA CVD APPARATUS, AND METAL
PLATE AND OSMIUM FORMING METHOD. The national stage number is 12/808,894
and has a 35 U.S.C. 371(c) date of 10 November 2010.
37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication
Notice is hereby given of the filing of a national stage application
with a petition under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application
without the signature of all inventors. The petition has been granted. A
notice has been sent to the last known address of the non-signing inventor.
The inventor whose signature is missing (Pedro E. Huertas) may join in the
application by promptly filing an appropriate oath or declaration complying
with 37 CFR 1.63. The international application number is PCT/US2008/011669
and was filed on 10 October 2008 in the names of Christopher MALCUIT, Linda
LEMIEUX, William HOLMES, Pedro HUERTAS, and Lucy VILNER for the invention
entitled IMPROVED METHODS OF PRODUCING RPE CELLS AND COMPOSITIONS OF RPE
CELLS. The national stage application number is 12/682,712 and has a 35
U.S.C. 371 date of 14 December 2010.

Notice of Inclusion of Trademark Registration Certificate Maintenance
Requirements Page in Trademark Document Retrieval Database
The practice of the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("Office")
has been to provide notice of trademark maintenance requirements with
trademark registration certificates sent to registrants, but not to upload
this information as part of the record into the Trademark Document
Retrieval ("TDR") database. As of July 5, 2011, the Office will upload the
maintenance requirements page of new trademark registration certificates
and updated registration certificates in the TDR database so that the
database will reflect the maintenance requirement information provided to
the registrant.
Although, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1057(a), 37 CFR 2.151, 2.162, and 7.38,
maintenance requirement information has previously accompanied trademark
registration certificates, the information was not uploaded to the TDR
database. To include in the record the trademark registration maintenance
requirement information now provided as part of the trademark registration
certificate and to ensure that registration maintenance information is
readily available to trademark owners when viewing their registrations
electronically, the Office will be including the maintenance requirements
page of trademark registration certificates and updated registration
certificates in the TDR database. The Office intends to include the
maintenance requirement page in TDR for new and updated trademark
registration certificates uploaded on or after July 5, 2011.
The Office prefers that any inquiries on this notice be made via
electronic mail message to TMFRNotices@uspto.gov, or to Cynthia C. Lynch,
Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Trademark Examination Policy, by
telephone at (571) 272-8742.
June 30, 2011 DEBORAH S. COHN
Commissioner for Trademarks
United States Patent and Trademark Office

In order to improve the PPH program and make it available to a wider range of applicants, the USPTO and IPAU have agreed to revise the requirements for requesting participation in the PPH pilot program. The revised requirements and the trial period are set forth below and supersede all prior PPH notices between the USPTO and IPAU. The PCT-PPH pilot program is not affected by the current notice and remains available to the applicants under the existing guidelines. See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2011/week07/TOC.htm#ref15.

II. Trial Period for the PPH Pilot Program

The PPH pilot program with the revised requirements will commence on July 15, 2011, for a period of one year ending on July 14, 2012. The revised requirements will apply to PPH requests filed in the USPTO on or after July 15, 2011, based on claims that have been determined allowable by IPAU in a corresponding application filed in IPAU. The trial period may be extended for up to an additional year if necessary to adequately assess the feasibility of the PPH program. The USPTO and IPAU will evaluate the results of the pilot program to determine whether and how the program should be fully implemented after the trial period. The Offices may also terminate the PPH pilot program early if the volume of participation exceeds a manageable level, or for any other reason. Notice will be published if the PPH pilot program will be terminated before the July 14, 2012 date.

III. Revised Requirements for Requesting Participation in the PPH Program in the USPTO

In order to be eligible to participate in the PPH program in the USPTO, the following conditions must be met:

(1) The U.S. application for which participation in the PPH program is requested and the corresponding IPAU application must have the same priority/filing date. In particular, the U.S. application (including national stage entry of a PCT application and a so-called bypass application filed under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a) which validly claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to a PCT application):

(Case I) – is an application that validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a) and 37 CFR 1.55 to one or more applications filed with IPAU (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures A, B, C and D),

or

(Case II) – is an application which is the basis of a valid priority claim under the Paris Convention for the application filed in IPAU (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures E, F and G),

or

(Case III) – is an application which shares a common priority document with the application filed in IPAU (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures H, I, J, K, L, M and N),

or

(Case IV) – and the IPAU application are derived from/related to a PCT application having no priority claim (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figure O).

Provisional applications, plant applications, design applications, reissue applications, reexamination proceedings, and applications subject to a secrecy order are excluded and not subject to participation in the PPH.

(2) At least one claim was determined by IPAU to be allowable/patentable. The applicant must submit a copy of the allowable/patentable claims from the IPAU application. If the IPAU office action does not explicitly state that a particular claim is allowable, the applicant must include a statement in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program or in the transmittal letter accompanying the request for participation that no rejection has been made in the IPAU office action regarding that claim, and therefore, the claim is deemed allowable by IPAU.

(3) All claims on file, as originally filed or as amended, for examination under the PPH must sufficiently correspond to one or more of those claims indicated as allowable in the IPAU. Claims are considered to "sufficiently correspond" where, accounting for differences due to translations and claim format, the claims in the USPTO are of the same or similar scope as the claims in the IPAU, or the claims in the USPTO are narrower in scope than the claims in the IPAU. In this regard, a claim that is narrower in scope occurs when a IPAU claim is amended to be further limited by an additional feature that is supported in the specification (description and/or claims). A claim in the USPTO which introduces a new/different category of claims to those claims indicated as allowable in the IPAU is not considered to sufficiently correspond. For example, if the IPAU claims only contain claims to a process of manufacturing a product, then the claims in the USPTO are not considered to sufficiently correspond if the USPTO claims introduce product claims that are dependent on the corresponding process claims.

The additional limitation that makes the claims in the U.S. application narrower in scope than the allowable/patentable claims in the IPAU application must have support in the written description of the U.S. application and the additional limitation must be presented in dependent form. The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table in English. The claims correspondence table must indicate how all the claims in the U.S. application correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the IPAU application(s). The dependent claims with the additional limitations must be clearly identified in the claims correspondence table.

(4) Examination of the U.S. application for which participation in the PPH pilot program is requested has not begun.

(5) The applicant must file a request for participation in the PPH pilot program and a request that the U.S. application be advanced out of turn for examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). A revised request form (PTO/SB/20AU) will be available from the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov on July 15, 2011. Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO request form. A petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(h) is NOT required. See Notice Regarding the Elimination of the Fee for Petitions To Make Special Filed Under the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programs, 75 Fed. Reg. 29312 (May 25, 2010).

(6) The applicant must submit a copy of all the office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the IPAU application(s) containing the allowable/patentable claims that are the basis for the request. In addition, the applicant must submit copies of any office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the IPAU application(s) issued after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program in the USPTO (especially where IPAU might have reversed a prior holding of allowability).

(7) The applicant must submit an information disclosure statement (IDS) listing the documents cited by the IPAU examiner in the IPAU office action (unless such an IDS has already been filed in the U.S. application). The applicant must submit copies of all the documents cited in the IPAU office action (unless the copies have already been filed in the U.S. application) except U.S. patents or U.S. patent application publications.

The request for participation in the PPH pilot program and all the supporting documents must be submitted to the USPTO via EFS-Web and indexed with the following document description: “Petition to make special under Patent Pros Hwy.” Information regarding EFS-Web is available at http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/efs_help.html. Any preliminary amendment or IDS submitted with the PPH documents must be separately indexed as a preliminary amendment or an IDS, respectively.

Where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status are granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. In those instances where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program does not meet all the requirements set forth above, the applicant will be notified and the defects in the request will be identified. The applicant will be given one opportunity to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation (which must be submitted via EFS-Web and indexed accordingly as noted above). Note that action on the application by the examiner will NOT be suspended (37 CFR 1.103) awaiting a reply by the applicant to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation. That is, if the application is picked up for examination by the examiner after the applicant has been notified of the defects in the request, any renewed request will be dismissed. If the renewed request is perfected and examination has not begun, the request and special status will be granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. If not perfected, the applicant will be notified and the application will await action in its regular turn.

(8) Request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status granted in a parent application will not carry over to a continuing application. The applicant must fulfill all the conditions set forth above in order for special status to be granted in the continuing application.

If any of the documents identified in items (2), (6) and (7) above have already been filed in the U.S. application prior to the request for participation in the PPH pilot program, it will not be necessary for the applicant to resubmit these documents with the request for participation. The applicant may simply refer to these documents and indicate in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program when these documents were previously filed in the U.S. application.

IV. Special Examining Procedures

Once the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status have been granted to the U.S. application, the U.S. application will be taken up for examination by the U.S. examiner before all other categories of applications except those clearly in condition for allowance, those with set time limits, such as examiner’s answers, and those that have been granted special status for “accelerated examination.”

Any claims amended or added after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program must sufficiently correspond to one or more allowable/patentable claims in the IPAU application(s). The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table along with the amendment (see III.(3) above). If the amended or newly added claims do not sufficiently correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the IPAU application(s), the amendment will not be entered and will be treated as a non-responsive reply.

The PPH program does not absolve applicants of all their duties under 37 CFR 1.56 and 37 CFR 11.18. By complying with requirements III.(6) and (7) identified above, applicants would be considered to have complied with their duties to bring to the attention of the USPTO any material prior art cited in the corresponding foreign application(s) (see MPEP § 2001.06(a)). Applicants still have a duty of candor and good faith, including providing to the USPTO other information known to them to be material to patentability.

Any inquiries concerning this notice may be directed to Magdalen Greenlief, Office of the Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, at 571-272-8140 or at magdalen.greenlief@uspto.gov.

In order to improve the PPH program and make it available to a wider range of applicants, the USPTO and CIPO have agreed to revise the requirements for requesting participation in the PPH program. The revised requirements and the trial period are set forth below and supersede all prior PPH notices between the USPTO and CIPO.

II. Trial Period for the PPH Program

The PPH program with the revised requirements will commence on July 15, 2011, for a period of one year ending on July 14, 2012. The revised requirements will apply to PPH requests filed in the USPTO on or after July 15, 2011, based on claims that have been determined allowable by CIPO in a corresponding application filed in CIPO. The trial period may be extended for up to an additional year if necessary to adequately assess the feasibility of the PPH program. The USPTO and CIPO will evaluate the results of the PPH program to determine whether and how the program should be implemented after the trial period. The Offices may also terminate the PPH program early if the volume of participation exceeds a manageable level, or for any other reason. Notice will be published if the PPH program will be terminated before the July 14, 2012 date.

III. Revised Requirements for Requesting Participation in the PPH Program in the USPTO

In order to be eligible to participate in the PPH program in the USPTO, the following conditions must be met:

(1) The U.S. application for which participation in the PPH program is requested and the corresponding CIPO application must have the same priority/filing date. In particular, the U.S. application (including national stage entry of a PCT application and a so-called bypass application filed under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a) which validly claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to a PCT application):

(Case I) – is an application that validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a) and 37 CFR 1.55 to one or more applications filed with CIPO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures A, B, C and D),

or

(Case II) – is an application which is the basis of a valid priority claim under the Paris Convention for the application filed in CIPO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures E, F and G),

or

(Case III) – is an application which shares a common priority document with the application filed in CIPO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures H, I, J, K, L, M and N),

or

(Case IV) – and the CIPO application are derived from/related to a PCT application having no priority claim (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figure O).

Provisional applications, plant applications, design applications, reissue applications, reexamination proceedings, and applications subject to a secrecy order are excluded and not subject to participation in the PPH.

(2) At least one claim was determined by CIPO to be allowable/patentable. The applicant must submit a copy of the allowable/patentable claims from the CIPO application along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the claims are not in the English language. If the CIPO office action does not explicitly state that a particular claim is allowable, the applicant must include a statement in the request for participation in the PPH program or in the transmittal letter accompanying the request for participation that no rejection has been made in the CIPO office action regarding that claim, and therefore, the claim is deemed allowable by CIPO.

(3) All claims on file, as originally filed or as amended, for examination under the PPH must sufficiently correspond to one or more of those claims indicated as allowable in the CIPO. Claims are considered to "sufficiently correspond" where, accounting for differences due to translations and claim format, the claims in the USPTO are of the same or similar scope as the claims in the CIPO, or the claims in the USPTO are narrower in scope than the claims in the CIPO. In this regard, a claim that is narrower in scope occurs when a CIPO claim is amended to be further limited by an additional feature that is supported in the specification (description and/or claims). A claim in the USPTO which introduces a new/different category of claims to those claims indicated as allowable in the CIPO is not considered to sufficiently correspond. For example, if the CIPO claims only contain claims to a process of manufacturing a product, then the claims in the USPTO are not considered to sufficiently correspond if the USPTO claims introduce product claims that are dependent on the corresponding process claims.

The additional limitation that makes the claims in the U.S. application narrower in scope than the allowable/patentable claims in the CIPO application must have support in the written description of the U.S. application and the additional limitation must be presented in dependent form. The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table in English. The claims correspondence table must indicate how all the claims in the U.S. application correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the CIPO application(s). The dependent claims with the additional limitations must be clearly identified in the claims correspondence table.

(4) Examination of the U.S. application for which participation in the PPH program is requested has not begun.

(5) The applicant must file a request for participation in the PPH program and a request that the U.S. application be advanced out of turn for examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). A revised request form (PTO/SB/20CA) will be available from the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov on July 15, 2011. Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO request form. A petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(h) is NOT required. See Notice Regarding the Elimination of the Fee for Petitions To Make Special Filed Under the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programs, 75 Fed. Reg. 29312 (May 25, 2010).

(6) The applicant must submit a copy of all the office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the CIPO application(s) containing the allowable/patentable claims that are the basis for the request, along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the office actions are not in the English language. In addition, the applicant must submit copies of any office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the CIPO application(s) issued after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH program in the USPTO (especially where CIPO might have reversed a prior holding of allowability).

(7) The applicant must submit an information disclosure statement (IDS) listing the documents cited by the CIPO examiner in the CIPO office action (unless such an IDS has already been filed in the U.S. application). The applicant must submit copies of all the documents cited in the CIPO office action (unless the copies have already been filed in the U.S. application) except U.S. patents or U.S. patent application publications.

The request for participation in the PPH program and all the supporting documents must be submitted to the USPTO via EFS-Web and indexed with the following document description: “Petition to make special under Patent Pros Hwy.” Information regarding EFS-Web is available at http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/efs_help.html. Any preliminary amendment or IDS submitted with the PPH documents must be separately indexed as a preliminary amendment or an IDS, respectively.

Where the request for participation in the PPH program and special status are granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. In those instances where the request for participation in the PPH program does not meet all the requirements set forth above, the applicant will be notified and the defects in the request will be identified. The applicant will be given one opportunity to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation (which must be submitted via EFS-Web and indexed accordingly as noted above). Note that action on the application by the examiner will NOT be suspended (37 CFR 1.103) awaiting a reply by the applicant to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation. That is, if the application is picked up for examination by the examiner after the applicant has been notified of the defects in the request, any renewed request will be dismissed. If the renewed request is perfected and examination has not begun, the request and special status will be granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. If not perfected, the applicant will be notified and the application will await action in its regular turn.

(8) Request for participation in the PPH program and special status granted in a parent application will not carry over to a continuing application. The applicant must fulfill all the conditions set forth above in order for special status to be granted in the continuing application.

If any of the documents identified in items (2), (6) and (7) above have already been filed in the U.S. application prior to the request for participation in the PPH program, it will not be necessary for the applicant to resubmit these documents with the request for participation. The applicant may simply refer to these documents and indicate in the request for participation in the PPH program when these documents were previously filed in the U.S. application.

IV. Special Examining Procedures

Once the request for participation in the PPH program and special status have been granted to the U.S. application, the U.S. application will be taken up for examination by the U.S. examiner before all other categories of applications except those clearly in condition for allowance, those with set time limits, such as examiner’s answers, and those that have been granted special status for “accelerated examination.”

Any claims amended or added after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH program must sufficiently correspond to one or more allowable/patentable claims in the CIPO application(s). The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table along with the amendment (see III.(3) above). If the amended or newly added claims do not sufficiently correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the CIPO application(s), the amendment will not be entered and will be treated as a non-responsive reply.

The PPH program does not absolve applicants of all their duties under 37 CFR 1.56 and 37 CFR 11.18. By complying with requirements III.(6) and (7) identified above, applicants would be considered to have complied with their duties to bring to the attention of the USPTO any material prior art cited in the corresponding foreign application(s) (see MPEP § 2001.06(a)). Applicants still have a duty of candor and good faith, including providing to the USPTO other information known to them to be material to patentability.

Any inquiries concerning this notice may be directed to Magdalen Greenlief, Office of the Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, at 571-272-8140 or at magdalen.greenlief@uspto.gov.

ANNEX

Revised Requirements for the Patent Prosecution Highway Program between the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the National Board of Patents and Registration of Finland

Revised Requirements for the Patent Prosecution Highway Program between the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the National Board of Patents and Registration of Finland

I. Background

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) implemented a patent prosecution highway (PPH) pilot program with the National Board of Patents and Registration of Finland (NBPR) on July 6, 2009. See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2009/week29/TOC.htm#ref12. The USPTO and NBPR agreed to extend the PPH pilot program until further notice.

In order to improve the PPH program and make it available to a wider range of applicants, the USPTO and NBPR have agreed to revise the requirements for requesting participation in the PPH pilot program. The revised requirements and the trial period are set forth below and supersede all prior PPH notices between the USPTO and NBPR. The PCT-PPH pilot program is not affected by the current notice and remains available to the applicants under the existing guidelines. See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2011/week07/TOC.htm#ref13.

II. Trial Period for the PPH Pilot Program

The PPH pilot program with the revised requirements will commence on July 15, 2011, for a period of one year ending on July 14, 2012. The revised requirements will apply to PPH requests filed in the USPTO on or after July 15, 2011, based on claims that have been determined allowable by NBPR in a corresponding application filed in NBPR. The trial period may be extended for up to an additional year if necessary to adequately assess the feasibility of the PPH program. The USPTO and NBPR will evaluate the results of the pilot program to determine whether and how the program should be fully implemented after the trial period. The Offices may also terminate the PPH pilot program early if the volume of participation exceeds a manageable level, or for any other reason. Notice will be published if the PPH pilot program will be terminated before the July 14, 2012 date.

III. Revised Requirements for Requesting Participation in the PPH Program in the USPTO

In order to be eligible to participate in the PPH program in the USPTO, the following conditions must be met:

(1) The U.S. application for which participation in the PPH program is requested and the corresponding NBPR application must have the same priority/filing date. In particular, the U.S. application (including national stage entry of a PCT application and a so-called bypass application filed under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a) which validly claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to a PCT application):

(Case I) – is an application that validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a) and 37 CFR 1.55 to one or more applications filed with NBPR (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures A, B, C and D),

or

(Case II) – is an application which is the basis of a valid priority claim under the Paris Convention for the application filed in NBPR (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures E, F and G),

or

(Case III) – is an application which shares a common priority document with the application filed in NBPR (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures H, I, J, K, L, M and N),

or

(Case IV) – and the NBPR application are derived from/related to a PCT application having no priority claim (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figure O).

Provisional applications, plant applications, design applications, reissue applications, reexamination proceedings, and applications subject to a secrecy order are excluded and not subject to participation in the PPH.

(2) At least one claim was determined by NBPR to be allowable/patentable. The applicant must submit a copy of the allowable/patentable claims from the NBPR application along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the claims are not in the English language. If the NBPR office action does not explicitly state that a particular claim is allowable, the applicant must include a statement in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program or in the transmittal letter accompanying the request for participation that no rejection has been made in the NBPR office action regarding that claim, and therefore, the claim is deemed allowable by NBPR.

(3) All claims on file, as originally filed or as amended, for examination under the PPH must sufficiently correspond to one or more of those claims indicated as allowable in the NBPR. Claims are considered to "sufficiently correspond" where, accounting for differences due to translations and claim format, the claims in the USPTO are of the same or similar scope as the claims in the NBPR, or the claims in the USPTO are narrower in scope than the claims in the NBPR. In this regard, a claim that is narrower in scope occurs when a NBPR claim is amended to be further limited by an additional feature that is supported in the specification (description and/or claims). A claim in the USPTO which introduces a new/different category of claims to those claims indicated as allowable in the NBPR is not considered to sufficiently correspond. For example, if the NBPR claims only contain claims to a process of manufacturing a product, then the claims in the USPTO are not considered to sufficiently correspond if the USPTO claims introduce product claims that are dependent on the corresponding process claims.

The additional limitation that makes the claims in the U.S. application narrower in scope than the allowable/patentable claims in the NBPR application must have support in the written description of the U.S. application and the additional limitation must be presented in dependent form. The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table in English. The claims correspondence table must indicate how all the claims in the U.S. application correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the NBPR application(s). The dependent claims with the additional limitations must be clearly identified in the claims correspondence table.

(4) Examination of the U.S. application for which participation in the PPH pilot program is requested has not begun.

(5) The applicant must file a request for participation in the PPH pilot program and a request that the U.S. application be advanced out of turn for examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). A revised request form (PTO/SB/20FI) will be available from the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov on July 15, 2011. Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO request form. A petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(h) is NOT required. See Notice Regarding the Elimination of the Fee for Petitions To Make Special Filed Under the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programs, 75 Fed. Reg. 29312 (May 25, 2010).

(6) The applicant must submit a copy of all the office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the NBPR application(s) containing the allowable/patentable claims that are the basis for the request, along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the office actions are not in the English language. In addition, the applicant must submit copies of any office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the NBPR application(s) issued after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program in the USPTO (especially where NBPR might have reversed a prior holding of allowability).

(7) The applicant must submit an information disclosure statement (IDS) listing the documents cited by the NBPR examiner in the NBPR office action (unless such an IDS has already been filed in the U.S. application). The applicant must submit copies of all the documents cited in the NBPR office action (unless the copies have already been filed in the U.S. application) except U.S. patents or U.S. patent application publications.

The request for participation in the PPH pilot program and all the supporting documents must be submitted to the USPTO via EFS-Web and indexed with the following document description: “Petition to make special under Patent Pros Hwy.” Information regarding EFS-Web is available at http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/efs_help.html. Any preliminary amendment or IDS submitted with the PPH documents must be separately indexed as a preliminary amendment or an IDS, respectively.

Where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status are granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. In those instances where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program does not meet all the requirements set forth above, the applicant will be notified and the defects in the request will be identified. The applicant will be given one opportunity to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation (which must be submitted via EFS-Web and indexed accordingly as noted above). Note that action on the application by the examiner will NOT be suspended (37 CFR 1.103) awaiting a reply by the applicant to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation. That is, if the application is picked up for examination by the examiner after the applicant has been notified of the defects in the request, any renewed request will be dismissed. If the renewed request is perfected and examination has not begun, the request and special status will be granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. If not perfected, the applicant will be notified and the application will await action in its regular turn.

(8) Request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status granted in a parent application will not carry over to a continuing application. The applicant must fulfill all the conditions set forth above in order for special status to be granted in the continuing application.

If any of the documents identified in items (2), (6) and (7) above have already been filed in the U.S. application prior to the request for participation in the PPH pilot program, it will not be necessary for the applicant to resubmit these documents with the request for participation. The applicant may simply refer to these documents and indicate in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program when these documents were previously filed in the U.S. application.

IV. Special Examining Procedures

Once the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status have been granted to the U.S. application, the U.S. application will be taken up for examination by the U.S. examiner before all other categories of applications except those clearly in condition for allowance, those with set time limits, such as examiner’s answers, and those that have been granted special status for “accelerated examination.”

Any claims amended or added after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program must sufficiently correspond to one or more allowable/patentable claims in the NBPR application(s). The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table along with the amendment (see III.(3) above). If the amended or newly added claims do not sufficiently correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the NBPR application(s), the amendment will not be entered and will be treated as a non-responsive reply.

The PPH program does not absolve applicants of all their duties under 37 CFR 1.56 and 37 CFR 11.18. By complying with requirements III.(6) and (7) identified above, applicants would be considered to have complied with their duties to bring to the attention of the USPTO any material prior art cited in the corresponding foreign application(s) (see MPEP § 2001.06(a)). Applicants still have a duty of candor and good faith, including providing to the USPTO other information known to them to be material to patentability.

Any inquiries concerning this notice may be directed to Magdalen Greenlief, Office of the Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, at 571-272-8140 or at magdalen.greenlief@uspto.gov.

In order to improve the PPH program and make it available to a wider range of applicants, the USPTO and JPO have agreed to revise the requirements for requesting participation in the PPH program. The revised requirements and the trial period are set forth below and supersede all prior PPH notices between the USPTO and JPO. The PCT-PPH pilot program is not affected by the current notice and remains available to the applicants under the existing guidelines. See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2010/week08/TOC.htm#ref17.

II. Trial Period for the PPH Program

The PPH program with the revised requirements will commence on July 15, 2011, for a period of one year ending on July 14, 2012. The revised requirements will apply to PPH requests filed in the USPTO on or after July 15, 2011, based on claims that have been determined allowable by JPO in a corresponding application filed in JPO. The trial period may be extended for up to an additional year if necessary to adequately assess the feasibility of the PPH program. The USPTO and JPO will evaluate the results of the PPH program to determine whether and how the program should be implemented after the trial period. The Offices may also terminate the PPH program early if the volume of participation exceeds a manageable level, or for any other reason. Notice will be published if the PPH program will be terminated before the July 14, 2012 date.

III. Revised Requirements for Requesting Participation in the PPH Program in the USPTO

In order to be eligible to participate in the PPH program in the USPTO, the following conditions must be met:

(1) The U.S. application for which participation in the PPH program is requested and the corresponding JPO application must have the same priority/filing date. In particular, the U.S. application (including national stage entry of a PCT application and a so-called bypass application filed under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a) which validly claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to a PCT application):

(Case I) – is an application that validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a) and 37 CFR 1.55 to one or more applications filed with JPO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures A, B, C and D),

or

(Case II) – is an application which is the basis of a valid priority claim under the Paris Convention for the application filed in JPO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures E, F and G),

or

(Case III) – is an application which shares a common priority document with the application filed in JPO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures H, I, J, K, L, M and N),

or

(Case IV) – and the JPO application are derived from/related to a PCT application having no priority claim (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figure O).

Provisional applications, plant applications, design applications, reissue applications, reexamination proceedings, and applications subject to a secrecy order are excluded and not subject to participation in the PPH.

(2) At least one claim was determined by JPO to be allowable/patentable. The applicant must submit a copy of the allowable/patentable claims from the JPO application along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the claims are not in the English language. If the JPO office action does not explicitly state that a particular claim is allowable, the applicant must include a statement in the request for participation in the PPH program or in the transmittal letter accompanying the request for participation that no rejection has been made in the JPO office action regarding that claim, and therefore, the claim is deemed allowable by JPO.

(3) All claims on file, as originally filed or as amended, for examination under the PPH must sufficiently correspond to one or more of those claims indicated as allowable in the JPO. Claims are considered to "sufficiently correspond" where, accounting for differences due to translations and claim format, the claims in the USPTO are of the same or similar scope as the claims in the JPO, or the claims in the USPTO are narrower in scope than the claims in the JPO. In this regard, a claim that is narrower in scope occurs when a JPO claim is amended to be further limited by an additional feature that is supported in the specification (description and/or claims). A claim in the USPTO which introduces a new/different category of claims to those claims indicated as allowable in the JPO is not considered to sufficiently correspond. For example, if the JPO claims only contain claims to a process of manufacturing a product, then the claims in the USPTO are not considered to sufficiently correspond if the USPTO claims introduce product claims that are dependent on the corresponding process claims.

The additional limitation that makes the claims in the U.S. application narrower in scope than the allowable/patentable claims in the JPO application must have support in the written description of the U.S. application and the additional limitation must be presented in dependent form. The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table in English. The claims correspondence table must indicate how all the claims in the U.S. application correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the JPO application(s). The dependent claims with the additional limitations must be clearly identified in the claims correspondence table.

(4) Examination of the U.S. application for which participation in the PPH program is requested has not begun.

(5) The applicant must file a request for participation in the PPH program and a request that the U.S. application be advanced out of turn for examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). A revised request form (PTO/SB/20JP) will be available from the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov on July 15, 2011. Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO request form. A petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(h) is NOT required. See Notice Regarding the Elimination of the Fee for Petitions To Make Special Filed Under the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programs, 75 Fed. Reg. 29312 (May 25, 2010).

(6) The applicant must submit a copy of the office action from the JPO application just prior to the “Decision to Grant a Patent” (e.g., the latest “Notification of Reasons for Refusal”) from each of the JPO application(s) containing the allowable/patentable claims that are the basis for the request, along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the office actions are not in the English language. It will not be necessary for applicant to submit a copy of the “Decision to Grant a Patent” and an English translation thereof. If the JPO application is a first action allowance, i.e., there is no office action just prior to the “Decision to Grant a Patent,” then applicant should indicate on the request form that no office action from the JPO application is submitted since the JPO application was a first action allowance.

The applicant must submit copies of any office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the JPO application(s) issued after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH program in the USPTO (especially where JPO might have reversed a prior holding of allowability).

(7) The applicant must submit an information disclosure statement (IDS) listing the documents cited by the JPO examiner in the JPO office action (unless such an IDS has already been filed in the U.S. application). The applicant must submit copies of all the documents cited in the JPO office action (unless the copies have already been filed in the U.S. application) except U.S. patents or U.S. patent application publications.

The request for participation in the PPH program and all the supporting documents must be submitted to the USPTO via EFS-Web and indexed with the following document description: “Petition to make special under Patent Pros Hwy.” Information regarding EFS-Web is available at http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/efs_help.html. Any preliminary amendment or IDS submitted with the PPH documents must be separately indexed as a preliminary amendment or an IDS, respectively.

Where the request for participation in the PPH program and special status are granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. In those instances where the request for participation in the PPH program does not meet all the requirements set forth above, the applicant will be notified and the defects in the request will be identified. The applicant will be given one opportunity to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation (which must be submitted via EFS-Web and indexed accordingly as noted above). Note that action on the application by the examiner will NOT be suspended (37 CFR 1.103) awaiting a reply by the applicant to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation. That is, if the application is picked up for examination by the examiner after the applicant has been notified of the defects in the request, any renewed request will be dismissed. If the renewed request is perfected and examination has not begun, the request and special status will be granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. If not perfected, the applicant will be notified and the application will await action in its regular turn.

(8) Request for participation in the PPH program and special status granted in a parent application will not carry over to a continuing application. The applicant must fulfill all the conditions set forth above in order for special status to be granted in the continuing application.

If any of the documents identified in items (2), (6) and (7) above have already been filed in the U.S. application prior to the request for participation in the PPH program, it will not be necessary for the applicant to resubmit these documents with the request for participation. The applicant may simply refer to these documents and indicate in the request for participation in the PPH program when these documents were previously filed in the U.S. application.

IV. Special Examining Procedures

Once the request for participation in the PPH program and special status have been granted to the U.S. application, the U.S. application will be taken up for examination by the U.S. examiner before all other categories of applications except those clearly in condition for allowance, those with set time limits, such as examiner’s answers, and those that have been granted special status for “accelerated examination.”

Any claims amended or added after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH program must sufficiently correspond to one or more allowable/patentable claims in the JPO application(s). The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table along with the amendment (see III.(3) above). If the amended or newly added claims do not sufficiently correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the JPO application(s), the amendment will not be entered and will be treated as a non-responsive reply.

The PPH program does not absolve applicants of all their duties under 37 CFR 1.56 and 37 CFR 11.18. By complying with requirements III.(6) and (7) identified above, applicants would be considered to have complied with their duties to bring to the attention of the USPTO any material prior art cited in the corresponding foreign application(s) (see MPEP § 2001.06(a)). Applicants still have a duty of candor and good faith, including providing to the USPTO other information known to them to be material to patentability.

Any inquiries concerning this notice may be directed to Magdalen Greenlief, Office of the Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, at 571-272-8140 or at magdalen.greenlief@uspto.gov.

ANNEX

Revised Requirements for the Patent Prosecution Highway Program between the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the Federal Service on Intellectual Property, Patents & Trademarks of Russia

Revised Requirements for the Patent Prosecution Highway Program between the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the Federal Service on Intellectual Property, Patents & Trademarks of Russia

I. Background

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) implemented a patent prosecution highway (PPH) pilot program with the Federal Service on Intellectual Property, Patents & Trademarks of Russia (Rospatent) on September 1, 2010. See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2010/week36/TOC.htm#ref11. The PPH pilot program is set to expire on August 31, 2011.

In order to improve the PPH program and make it available to a wider range of applicants, the USPTO and Rospatent have agreed to revise the requirements for requesting participation in the PPH pilot program. The revised requirements and the trial period are set forth below and supersede all prior PPH notices between the USPTO and Rospatent. The PCT-PPH pilot program is not affected by the current notice and remains available to the applicants under the existing guidelines. See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2010/week42/TOC.htm#ref14.

II. Trial Period for the PPH Pilot Program

The PPH pilot program with the revised requirements will commence on July 15, 2011, for a period of one year ending on July 14, 2012. The revised requirements will apply to PPH requests filed in the USPTO on or after July 15, 2011, based on claims that have been determined allowable by Rospatent in a corresponding application filed in Rospatent. The trial period may be extended for up to an additional year if necessary to adequately assess the feasibility of the PPH program. The USPTO and Rospatent will evaluate the results of the pilot program to determine whether and how the program should be fully implemented after the trial period. The Offices may also terminate the PPH pilot program early if the volume of participation exceeds a manageable level, or for any other reason. Notice will be published if the PPH pilot program will be terminated before the July 14, 2012 date.

III. Revised Requirements for Requesting Participation in the PPH Program in the USPTO

In order to be eligible to participate in the PPH program in the USPTO, the following conditions must be met:

(1) The U.S. application for which participation in the PPH program is requested and the corresponding Rospatent application must have the same priority/filing date. In particular, the U.S. application (including national stage entry of a PCT application and a so-called bypass application filed under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a) which validly claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to a PCT application):

(Case I) – is an application that validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a) and 37 CFR 1.55 to one or more applications filed with Rospatent (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures A, B, C and D),

or

(Case II) – is an application which is the basis of a valid priority claim under the Paris Convention for the application filed in Rospatent (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures E, F and G),

or

(Case III) – is an application which shares a common priority document with the application filed in Rospatent (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures H, I, J, K, L, M and N),

or

(Case IV) – and the Rospatent application are derived from/related to a PCT application having no priority claim (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figure O).

Provisional applications, plant applications, design applications, reissue applications, reexamination proceedings, and applications subject to a secrecy order are excluded and not subject to participation in the PPH.

(2) At least one claim was determined by Rospatent to be allowable/patentable. The applicant must submit a copy of the allowable/patentable claims from the Rospatent application along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the claims are not in the English language. If the Rospatent office action does not explicitly state that a particular claim is allowable, the applicant must include a statement in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program or in the transmittal letter accompanying the request for participation that no rejection has been made in the Rospatent office action regarding that claim, and therefore, the claim is deemed allowable by Rospatent.

(3) All claims on file, as originally filed or as amended, for examination under the PPH must sufficiently correspond to one or more of those claims indicated as allowable in the Rospatent. Claims are considered to "sufficiently correspond" where, accounting for differences due to translations and claim format, the claims in the USPTO are of the same or similar scope as the claims in the Rospatent, or the claims in the USPTO are narrower in scope than the claims in the Rospatent. In this regard, a claim that is narrower in scope occurs when a Rospatent claim is amended to be further limited by an additional feature that is supported in the specification (description and/or claims). A claim in the USPTO which introduces a new/different category of claims to those claims indicated as allowable in the Rospatent is not considered to sufficiently correspond. For example, if the Rospatent claims only contain claims to a process of manufacturing a product, then the claims in the USPTO are not considered to sufficiently correspond if the USPTO claims introduce product claims that are dependent on the corresponding process claims.

The additional limitation that makes the claims in the U.S. application narrower in scope than the allowable/patentable claims in the Rospatent application must have support in the written description of the U.S. application and the additional limitation must be presented in dependent form. The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table in English. The claims correspondence table must indicate how all the claims in the U.S. application correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the Rospatent application(s). The dependent claims with the additional limitations must be clearly identified in the claims correspondence table.

(4) Examination of the U.S. application for which participation in the PPH pilot program is requested has not begun.

(5) The applicant must file a request for participation in the PPH pilot program and a request that the U.S. application be advanced out of turn for examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). A revised request form (PTO/SB/20RU) will be available from the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov on July 15, 2011. Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO request form. A petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(h) is NOT required. See Notice Regarding the Elimination of the Fee for Petitions To Make Special Filed Under the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programs, 75 Fed. Reg. 29312 (May 25, 2010).

(6) The applicant must submit a copy of all the office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the Rospatent application(s) containing the allowable/patentable claims that are the basis for the request, along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the office actions are not in the English language. In addition, the applicant must submit copies of any office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the Rospatent application(s) issued after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program in the USPTO (especially where Rospatent might have reversed a prior holding of allowability).

(7) The applicant must submit an information disclosure statement (IDS) listing the documents cited by the Rospatent examiner in the Rospatent office action (unless such an IDS has already been filed in the U.S. application). The applicant must submit copies of all the documents cited in the Rospatent office action (unless the copies have already been filed in the U.S. application) except U.S. patents or U.S. patent application publications.

The request for participation in the PPH pilot program and all the supporting documents must be submitted to the USPTO via EFS-Web and indexed with the following document description: “Petition to make special under Patent Pros Hwy.” Information regarding EFS-Web is available at http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/efs_help.html. Any preliminary amendment or IDS submitted with the PPH documents must be separately indexed as a preliminary amendment or an IDS, respectively.

Where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status are granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. In those instances where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program does not meet all the requirements set forth above, the applicant will be notified and the defects in the request will be identified. The applicant will be given one opportunity to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation (which must be submitted via EFS-Web and indexed accordingly as noted above). Note that action on the application by the examiner will NOT be suspended (37 CFR 1.103) awaiting a reply by the applicant to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation. That is, if the application is picked up for examination by the examiner after the applicant has been notified of the defects in the request, any renewed request will be dismissed. If the renewed request is perfected and examination has not begun, the request and special status will be granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. If not perfected, the applicant will be notified and the application will await action in its regular turn.

(8) Request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status granted in a parent application will not carry over to a continuing application. The applicant must fulfill all the conditions set forth above in order for special status to be granted in the continuing application.

If any of the documents identified in items (2), (6) and (7) above have already been filed in the U.S. application prior to the request for participation in the PPH pilot program, it will not be necessary for the applicant to resubmit these documents with the request for participation. The applicant may simply refer to these documents and indicate in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program when these documents were previously filed in the U.S. application.

IV. Special Examining Procedures

Once the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status have been granted to the U.S. application, the U.S. application will be taken up for examination by the U.S. examiner before all other categories of applications except those clearly in condition for allowance, those with set time limits, such as examiner’s answers, and those that have been granted special status for “accelerated examination.”

Any claims amended or added after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program must sufficiently correspond to one or more allowable/patentable claims in the Rospatent application(s). The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table along with the amendment (see III.(3) above). If the amended or newly added claims do not sufficiently correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the Rospatent application(s), the amendment will not be entered and will be treated as a non-responsive reply.

The PPH program does not absolve applicants of all their duties under 37 CFR 1.56 and 37 CFR 11.18. By complying with requirements III.(6) and (7) identified above, applicants would be considered to have complied with their duties to bring to the attention of the USPTO any material prior art cited in the corresponding foreign application(s) (see MPEP § 2001.06(a)). Applicants still have a duty of candor and good faith, including providing to the USPTO other information known to them to be material to patentability.

Any inquiries concerning this notice may be directed to Magdalen Greenlief, Office of the Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, at 571-272-8140 or at magdalen.greenlief@uspto.gov.

In order to improve the PPH program and make it available to a wider range of applicants, the USPTO and SPTO have agreed to revise the requirements for requesting participation in the PPH pilot program. The revised requirements and the trial period are set forth below and supersede all prior PPH notices between the USPTO and SPTO. The PCT-PPH pilot program is not affected by the current notice and remains available to the applicants under the existing guidelines. See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2010/week43/TOC.htm#ref16.

II. Trial Period for the PPH Pilot Program

The PPH pilot program with the revised requirements will commence on July 15, 2011, for a period of one year ending on July 14, 2012. The revised requirements will apply to PPH requests filed in the USPTO on or after July 15, 2011, based on claims that have been determined allowable by SPTO in a corresponding application filed in SPTO. The trial period may be extended for up to an additional year if necessary to adequately assess the feasibility of the PPH program. The USPTO and SPTO will evaluate the results of the pilot program to determine whether and how the program should be fully implemented after the trial period. The Offices may also terminate the PPH pilot program early if the volume of participation exceeds a manageable level, or for any other reason. Notice will be published if the PPH pilot program will be terminated before the July 14, 2012 date.

III. Revised Requirements for Requesting Participation in the PPH Program in the USPTO

In order to be eligible to participate in the PPH program in the USPTO, the following conditions must be met:

(1) The U.S. application for which participation in the PPH program is requested and the corresponding SPTO application must have the same priority/filing date. In particular, the U.S. application (including national stage entry of a PCT application and a so-called bypass application filed under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a) which validly claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to a PCT application):

(Case I) – is an application that validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a) and 37 CFR 1.55 to one or more applications filed with SPTO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures A, B, C and D),

or

(Case II) – is an application which is the basis of a valid priority claim under the Paris Convention for the application filed in SPTO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures E, F and G),

or

(Case III) – is an application which shares a common priority document with the application filed in SPTO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures H, I, J, K, L, M and N),

or

(Case IV) – and the SPTO application are derived from/related to a PCT application having no priority claim (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figure O).

Provisional applications, plant applications, design applications, reissue applications, reexamination proceedings, and applications subject to a secrecy order are excluded and not subject to participation in the PPH.

(2) At least one claim was determined by SPTO to be allowable/patentable. The applicant must submit a copy of the allowable/patentable claims from the SPTO application along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the claims are not in the English language. If the SPTO office action does not explicitly state that a particular claim is allowable, the applicant must include a statement in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program or in the transmittal letter accompanying the request for participation that no rejection has been made in the SPTO office action regarding that claim, and therefore, the claim is deemed allowable by SPTO.

(3) All claims on file, as originally filed or as amended, for examination under the PPH must sufficiently correspond to one or more of those claims indicated as allowable in the SPTO. Claims are considered to "sufficiently correspond" where, accounting for differences due to translations and claim format, the claims in the USPTO are of the same or similar scope as the claims in the SPTO, or the claims in the USPTO are narrower in scope than the claims in the SPTO. In this regard, a claim that is narrower in scope occurs when a SPTO claim is amended to be further limited by an additional feature that is supported in the specification (description and/or claims). A claim in the USPTO which introduces a new/different category of claims to those claims indicated as allowable in the SPTO is not considered to sufficiently correspond. For example, if the SPTO claims only contain claims to a process of manufacturing a product, then the claims in the USPTO are not considered to sufficiently correspond if the USPTO claims introduce product claims that are dependent on the corresponding process claims.

The additional limitation that makes the claims in the U.S. application narrower in scope than the allowable/patentable claims in the SPTO application must have support in the written description of the U.S. application and the additional limitation must be presented in dependent form. The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table in English. The claims correspondence table must indicate how all the claims in the U.S. application correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the SPTO application(s). The dependent claims with the additional limitations must be clearly identified in the claims correspondence table.

(4) Examination of the U.S. application for which participation in the PPH pilot program is requested has not begun.

(5) The applicant must file a request for participation in the PPH pilot program and a request that the U.S. application be advanced out of turn for examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). A revised request form (PTO/SB/20ES) will be available from the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov on July 15, 2011. Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO request form. A petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(h) is NOT required. See Notice Regarding the Elimination of the Fee for Petitions To Make Special Filed Under the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programs, 75 Fed. Reg. 29312 (May 25, 2010).

(6) The applicant must submit a copy of all the office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the SPTO application(s) containing the allowable/patentable claims that are the basis for the request, along with an English translation thereof and a statement that the English translation is accurate if the office actions are not in the English language. In addition, the applicant must submit copies of any office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the SPTO application(s) issued after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program in the USPTO (especially where SPTO might have reversed a prior holding of allowability).

(7) The applicant must submit an information disclosure statement (IDS) listing the documents cited by the SPTO examiner in the SPTO office action (unless such an IDS has already been filed in the U.S. application). The applicant must submit copies of all the documents cited in the SPTO office action (unless the copies have already been filed in the U.S. application) except U.S. patents or U.S. patent application publications.

The request for participation in the PPH pilot program and all the supporting documents must be submitted to the USPTO via EFS-Web and indexed with the following document description: “Petition to make special under Patent Pros Hwy.” Information regarding EFS-Web is available at http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/efs_help.html. Any preliminary amendment or IDS submitted with the PPH documents must be separately indexed as a preliminary amendment or an IDS, respectively.

Where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status are granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. In those instances where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program does not meet all the requirements set forth above, the applicant will be notified and the defects in the request will be identified. The applicant will be given one opportunity to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation (which must be submitted via EFS-Web and indexed accordingly as noted above). Note that action on the application by the examiner will NOT be suspended (37 CFR 1.103) awaiting a reply by the applicant to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation. That is, if the application is picked up for examination by the examiner after the applicant has been notified of the defects in the request, any renewed request will be dismissed. If the renewed request is perfected and examination has not begun, the request and special status will be granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. If not perfected, the applicant will be notified and the application will await action in its regular turn.

(8) Request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status granted in a parent application will not carry over to a continuing application. The applicant must fulfill all the conditions set forth above in order for special status to be granted in the continuing application.

If any of the documents identified in items (2), (6) and (7) above have already been filed in the U.S. application prior to the request for participation in the PPH pilot program, it will not be necessary for the applicant to resubmit these documents with the request for participation. The applicant may simply refer to these documents and indicate in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program when these documents were previously filed in the U.S. application.

IV. Special Examining Procedures

Once the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status have been granted to the U.S. application, the U.S. application will be taken up for examination by the U.S. examiner before all other categories of applications except those clearly in condition for allowance, those with set time limits, such as examiner’s answers, and those that have been granted special status for “accelerated examination.”

Any claims amended or added after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program must sufficiently correspond to one or more allowable/patentable claims in the SPTO application(s). The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table along with the amendment (see III.(3) above). If the amended or newly added claims do not sufficiently correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the SPTO application(s), the amendment will not be entered and will be treated as a non-responsive reply.

The PPH program does not absolve applicants of all their duties under 37 CFR 1.56 and 37 CFR 11.18. By complying with requirements III.(6) and (7) identified above, applicants would be considered to have complied with their duties to bring to the attention of the USPTO any material prior art cited in the corresponding foreign application(s) (see MPEP § 2001.06(a)). Applicants still have a duty of candor and good faith, including providing to the USPTO other information known to them to be material to patentability.

Any inquiries concerning this notice may be directed to Magdalen Greenlief, Office of the Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, at 571-272-8140 or at magdalen.greenlief@uspto.gov.

ANNEX

Revised Requirements for the Patent Prosecution Highway Program between the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office

Revised Requirements for the Patent Prosecution Highway Program between the United States Patent and Trademark Office and the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office

I. Background

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) implemented a patent prosecution highway (PPH) pilot program with the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) on September 4, 2007. See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2007/week39/patpros.htm. The USPTO and UKIPO agreed to extend the PPH pilot program until further notice.

In order to improve the PPH program and make it available to a wider range of applicants, the USPTO and UKIPO have agreed to revise the requirements for requesting participation in the PPH pilot program. The revised requirements and the trial period are set forth below and supersede all prior PPH notices between the USPTO and UKIPO.

II. Trial Period for the PPH Pilot Program

The PPH pilot program with the revised requirements will commence on July 15, 2011, for a period of one year ending on July 14, 2012. The revised requirements will apply to PPH requests filed in the USPTO on or after July 15, 2011, based on claims that have been determined allowable by UKIPO in a corresponding application filed in UKIPO. The trial period may be extended for up to an additional year if necessary to adequately assess the feasibility of the PPH program. The USPTO and UKIPO will evaluate the results of the pilot program to determine whether and how the program should be fully implemented after the trial period. The Offices may also terminate the PPH pilot program early if the volume of participation exceeds a manageable level, or for any other reason. Notice will be published if the PPH pilot program will be terminated before the July 14, 2012 date.

III. Revised Requirements for Requesting Participation in the PPH Program in the USPTO

In order to be eligible to participate in the PPH program in the USPTO, the following conditions must be met:

(1) The U.S. application for which participation in the PPH program is requested and the corresponding UKIPO application must have the same priority/filing date. In particular, the U.S. application (including national stage entry of a PCT application and a so-called bypass application filed under 35 U.S.C. § 111(a) which validly claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to a PCT application):

(Case I) – is an application that validly claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a) and 37 CFR 1.55 to one or more applications filed with UKIPO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures A, B, C and D),

or

(Case II) – is an application which is the basis of a valid priority claim under the Paris Convention for the application filed in UKIPO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures E, F and G),

or

(Case III) – is an application which shares a common priority document with the application filed in UKIPO (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figures H, I, J, K, L, M and N),

or

(Case IV) – and the UKIPO application are derived from/related to a PCT application having no priority claim (examples are provided in the ANNEX, Figure O).

Provisional applications, plant applications, design applications, reissue applications, reexamination proceedings, and applications subject to a secrecy order are excluded and not subject to participation in the PPH.

(2) At least one claim was determined by UKIPO to be allowable/patentable. The applicant must submit a copy of the allowable/patentable claims from the UKIPO. If the UKIPO office action does not explicitly state that a particular claim is allowable, the applicant must include a statement in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program or in the transmittal letter accompanying the request for participation that no rejection has been made in the UKIPO office action regarding that claim, and therefore, the claim is deemed allowable by UKIPO.

(3) All claims on file, as originally filed or as amended, for examination under the PPH must sufficiently correspond to one or more of those claims indicated as allowable in the UKIPO. Claims are considered to "sufficiently correspond" where, accounting for differences due to translations and claim format, the claims in the USPTO are of the same or similar scope as the claims in the UKIPO, or the claims in the USPTO are narrower in scope than the claims in the UKIPO. In this regard, a claim that is narrower in scope occurs when a UKIPO claim is amended to be further limited by an additional feature that is supported in the specification (description and/or claims). A claim in the USPTO which introduces a new/different category of claims to those claims indicated as allowable in the UKIPO is not considered to sufficiently correspond. For example, if the UKIPO claims only contain claims to a process of manufacturing a product, then the claims in the USPTO are not considered to sufficiently correspond if the USPTO claims introduce product claims that are dependent on the corresponding process claims.

The additional limitation that makes the claims in the U.S. application narrower in scope than the allowable/patentable claims in the UKIPO application must have support in the written description of the U.S. application and the additional limitation must be presented in dependent form. The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table in English. The claims correspondence table must indicate how all the claims in the U.S. application correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the UKIPO application(s). The dependent claims with the additional limitations must be clearly identified in the claims correspondence table.

(4) Examination of the U.S. application for which participation in the PPH pilot program is requested has not begun.

(5) The applicant must file a request for participation in the PPH pilot program and a request that the U.S. application be advanced out of turn for examination by order of the Director to expedite the business of the Office under 37 CFR 1.102(a). A revised request form (PTO/SB/20UK) will be available from the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov on July 15, 2011. Applicants are encouraged to use the USPTO request form. A petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(h) is NOT required. See Notice Regarding the Elimination of the Fee for Petitions To Make Special Filed Under the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Programs, 75 Fed. Reg. 29312 (May 25, 2010).

(6) The applicant must submit a copy of all the office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the UKIPO application(s) containing the allowable/patentable claims that are the basis for the request. In addition, the applicant must submit copies of any office actions (which are relevant to patentability) from the UKIPO application(s) issued after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program in the USPTO (especially where SPTO might have reversed a prior holding of allowability).

(7) The applicant must submit an information disclosure statement (IDS) listing the documents cited by the UKIPO examiner in the UKIPO office action (unless such an IDS has already been filed in the U.S. application). The applicant must submit copies of all the documents cited in the UKIPO office action (unless the copies have already been filed in the U.S. application) except U.S. patents or U.S. patent application publications.

The request for participation in the PPH pilot program and all the supporting documents must be submitted to the USPTO via EFS-Web and indexed with the following document description: “Petition to make special under Patent Pros Hwy.” Information regarding EFS-Web is available at http://www.uspto.gov/ebc/efs_help.html. Any preliminary amendment or IDS submitted with the PPH documents must be separately indexed as a preliminary amendment or an IDS, respectively.

Where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status are granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. In those instances where the request for participation in the PPH pilot program does not meet all the requirements set forth above, the applicant will be notified and the defects in the request will be identified. The applicant will be given one opportunity to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation (which must be submitted via EFS-Web and indexed accordingly as noted above). Note that action on the application by the examiner will NOT be suspended (37 CFR 1.103) awaiting a reply by the applicant to perfect the request in a renewed request for participation. That is, if the application is picked up for examination by the examiner after the applicant has been notified of the defects in the request, any renewed request will be dismissed. If the renewed request is perfected and examination has not begun, the request and special status will be granted, the applicant will be notified and the U.S. application will be advanced out of turn for examination. If not perfected, the applicant will be notified and the application will await action in its regular turn.

(8) Request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status granted in a parent application will not carry over to a continuing application. The applicant must fulfill all the conditions set forth above in order for special status to be granted in the continuing application.

If any of the documents identified in items (2), (6) and (7) above have already been filed in the U.S. application prior to the request for participation in the PPH pilot program, it will not be necessary for the applicant to resubmit these documents with the request for participation. The applicant may simply refer to these documents and indicate in the request for participation in the PPH pilot program when these documents were previously filed in the U.S. application.

IV. Special Examining Procedures

Once the request for participation in the PPH pilot program and special status have been granted to the U.S. application, the U.S. application will be taken up for examination by the U.S. examiner before all other categories of applications except those clearly in condition for allowance, those with set time limits, such as examiner’s answers, and those that have been granted special status for “accelerated examination.”

Any claims amended or added after the grant of the request for participation in the PPH pilot program must sufficiently correspond to one or more allowable/patentable claims in the UKIPO application(s). The applicant is required to submit a claims correspondence table along with the amendment (see III.(3) above). If the amended or newly added claims do not sufficiently correspond to the allowable/patentable claims in the UKIPO application(s), the amendment will not be entered and will be treated as a non-responsive reply.

The PPH program does not absolve applicants of all their duties under 37 CFR 1.56 and 37 CFR 11.18. By complying with requirements III.(6) and (7) identified above, applicants would be considered to have complied with their duties to bring to the attention of the USPTO any material prior art cited in the corresponding foreign application(s) (see MPEP § 2001.06(a)). Applicants still have a duty of candor and good faith, including providing to the USPTO other information known to them to be material to patentability.

Any inquiries concerning this notice may be directed to Magdalen Greenlief, Office of the Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, at 571-272-8140 or at magdalen.greenlief@uspto.gov.

DAVID J. KAPPOS

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and

Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office

ANNEX

Errata
"All reference to Patent No. RE. 42,554 to Norman R. Wild, et al of
Nashua, NH for OPTICAL DETECTION SYSTEM appearing in the Official Gazette
of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,980,651 to Moriyoshi Inaba of Tokyo,
Japan for INK JET PRINTING METHOD AND INK JET PRINTING APPARATUS appearing
in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent
was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,981,079 to Tom Alheidt, et al of Lake
Stockholm, NJ for SAFETY SHIELD SYSTEM FOR A SYRINGE appearing in the
Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,981,178 to John Neiderman, et al of
Camdenton, MI for METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR REMOVING CONTAMINANTS FROM A
REFLOW APPARATUS appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should
be deleted since no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,981,813 to Shunpei Yamazaki, et al of
Tokyo, Japan for A METHOD OF FABRICATING LIGHT EMITTING DEVICES appearing
in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent
was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,981,934 to Zhiyun Kang, et al of Bejing,
China for CSI-1,2-SUBSTITUTED STILBENE DERIVATIVES AND THEIR USE IN
PREPARATION OF DRUGS FOR TREATMENT AND/OR PREVENTION OF DIABETES appearing
in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent
was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,982,176 to Kouji Morimoto of Kawasaki-Shi,
Japan for ABSOLUTE POSITION LENGTH MEASUREMENT TYPE ENCODER appearing in
the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,982,193 to Shigeki Matsuura, et al of
Shizuoka, Japan for IONIZING DEVICE appearing in the Official Gazette of
July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,982,419 to Makoto Kuwamura of Kyoto,
Japan for MOTOR DRIVE CIRUIT AND DISC DEVICE USING THE SAME appearing in
the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,982,440 to Tae Kyung Kang, et al of
Guro-Gu Korea, Republic Of for DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DETECTING ZERO
CROSSING AND VOLTAGE AMPLITUDE FROM SINGLE PULSE SIGNAL appearing in the
Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,982,449 to Jia Wei, et al of Cary, NC for
INDUCTOR ASSEMBLY HAVING A CORE WITH MAGNETICALLY ISOLATED FORMS appearing
in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent
was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,982,592 to Johan Engstrom, et al of
Goteborg, Sweden for METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR INTERACTION BETWEEN A VEHICLE
DRIVER AND PLURALITY OF APPLICATIONS appearing in the Official Gazette of
July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,982,811 to Tomoko Maruyama, et al of
Kanagawa, Japan for LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY APPARATUS HAVING PARTICULAR
OPTICAL COMPENSATION LAYERS appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19,

August 16, 2011

US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

1369 OG 175

2011 should be deleted since no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,982,891 to Deane A. Gardner, et al of
Cuppertino, CA for PRINTING DEVICE COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL appearing in the
Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,983,031 to Ikki Tatsukami of Kawasaki,
Japan for ELECTRONIC PART-MOUNTING COMPONENT AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since
no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,983,191 to Xiaolin Lu of Middletown, NJ
for COMMUNICATION NETWORK APPARATUS AND METHOD appearing in the Official
Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,983,336 to Alexandros Tourapis, et al of
West Wndsor, NJ for METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MINIMIZING NUMBER OF REFERENCE
PICTURES USED FOR INTER-CODING appearing in the Official Gazette of July
19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,983,518 to Noriyuki Juni of Ibaraki-Shi,
Japan for OPTICAL WAVEGUIDE FOR TOUGH PANEL AND TOUGH PANEL USING THE SAME
appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since
no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,983,709 to Hideto Furukawa, et al of
Kawsaki, Japan for RADIO CHANNEL CONTROL METHOD AND RECEIVING APPARATUS
appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since
no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,983,731 to Philipp Lang, et al of Redwood
City, CA for ASSESSING THE CONDITION OF A JOINT AND DEVISING TREAMENT
appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since
no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,983,861 to Mario Bilac, et al of
Lawrenceville, GA for DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR MONITORING ENERGY
SYSTEMS appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be
deleted since no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,983,905 to Masahiro Oshikiri, et al of
Kanagawa, Japan for ENCODER, DECODER, ENCODING METHOD, AND DECODING METHOD
appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since
no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,984,046 to Ashutosh Garg, et al of
Sunnyvale, CA for SESSION-BASED DYNAMIC SEARCH SNIPPETS appearing in the
Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,984,176 to James J. Fallon of Armonk, NY
for SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR ACCELERATED DATA STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL appearing
in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent
was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,984,299 to Arthur C. Leonard, et al of
Redmond, WA for DIGITAL SIGNATURES FOR EMBEDDED CODE appearing in the
Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,984,451 to Richard Williamson, et al of
San Francisco, CA for METHOD FOR ASSOCIATING DATA BEARING OBJECTS WITH USER
INTERFACE OBJECTS appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19, 2011 should
be deleted since no patent was granted."
"All reference to Patent No. 7,984,480 to Heikki Waris of Helsinki,
Finland for POLICY EXECUTION appearing in the Official Gazette of July 19,
2011 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

Erratum
In the notice of Certificate of Correction appearing in April 19, 2011,
delete all reference to Patent No. 7,387,041, issue of March 29, 2011. The
petition adding inventor was deemed improper by examiner of record. The
certificate of correction should not have been issued changing inventorship
in patent.
Erratum
In the notice of Certificate of Correction appearing in July 5, 2011,
delete all reference to Patent No. 6,117,932, issue of June 14, 2011. The
incorrect patent number was mentioned and certificate of correction should
not have been issued. No certificate of correction was filed for this
patent.

Mailing and Hand Carry Addresses for Mail to the United States Patent and Trademark Office

MAILING AND HAND CARRY ADDRESSES FOR
MAIL TO THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
MAIL TO BE DIRECTED TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
For most correspondence (e.g., new patent applications) no mail stop
is required because the processing of the correspondence is routine.
If NO mail stop is included on the list below, no mail stop is required
for the correspondence. See the listing under "Mail to be Directed to the
Director of the Patent And Trademark Office" for additional mail stops
for patent-related correspondence. Only the specified type of document
should be placed in an envelope addressed to one of these special mail
stops. If any documents other than the specified type identified for each
special mail stop are addressed to that mail stop, they will be
significantly delayed in reaching the appropriate area for which they are
intended. The mail stop should generally appear as the first line in
the address.
Most correspondence may be submitted electronically. See the USPTO's
Electronic Filing System (EFS-Web) internet page
http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/index.jsp for additional
information.
Please address mail to be delivered by the United States Postal Service
(USPS) as follows:
Mail Stop _____
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
If no Mail Stop is indicated below, the line beginning Mail Stop should
be omitted from the address.
Except correspondence for Maintenance Fee payments, Deposit Account
Replenishments (see 37 CFR 1.25(c)(4)), and Licensing and Review (see 37 CFR
5.1(c) and 5.2(c)), please address patent-related correspondence to be
delivered by other delivery services (Federal Express (Fed Ex), UPS, DHL,
Laser, Action, Purolator, etc.) as follows:
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Customer Service Window, Mail Stop _____
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Mail Stop
Designations Explanation
Mail Stop 12 Contributions to the Examiner Education Program.
Mail Stop 313(c) Petitions under 37 CFR 1.313(c) to withdraw a
patent application from issue after payment of
the issue fee and any papers associated with the
petition, including papers necessary for a
continuing application or a request for
continued examination (RCE).
Mail Stop AF Amendments and other responses after final
rejection (e.g., a notice of appeal (and any
request for pre-appeal brief conference)),
other than an appeal brief.
Mail Stop Amendment Information disclosure statements, drawings, and
replies to Office actions in patent applications
with or without an amendment to the application or
a terminal disclaimer. (Use Mail Stop AF for
replies after final rejection.)
Mail Stop Appeal For appeal briefs or other briefs under
Brief-Patents part 41 of title 37 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (e.g., former 37 CFR 1.192).
Mail Stop Public comments regarding patent-related
Comments-Patent regulations and procedures.
Mail Stop Conversion Requests under 37 CFR 1.53(c)(2) to convert a
nonprovisional application to a provisional
application and requests under 37 CFR 1.53(c)(3)
to convert a provisional application to a
nonprovisional application.
Mail Stop EBC Mail for the Electronic Business Center including:
Certificate Action Forms, Request for Customer
Number, and Requests for Customer Number Data
Change (USPTO Forms PTO-2042, PTO/SB/124A and 125A,
respectively) and Customer Number Upload
Spreadsheets and Cover Letters.
Mail Stop Expedited Only to be used for the initial filing of
Design design applications accompanied by a
request for expedited examination under
37 CFR 1.155.
Mail Stop Express Requests for abandonment of a patent
Abandonment application pursuant to 37 CFR 1.138,
including any petitions under 37 CFR
1.138(c) to expressly abandon an
application to avoid publication of the
application.
Mail Stop Applications under 35 U.S.C. 156 for patent term
Hatch-Waxman PTE extension based on regulatory review of a product
subject to pre-market review by a regulating
agency. This mail stop is also to be used for
additional correspondence regarding the
application for patent term extension under
35 U.S.C. 156. It is preferred that such initial
requests be hand-carried to:
Office of Patent Legal Administration
Room MDW 7D55
600 Dulany Street (Madison Building)
Alexandria, VA 22314
Mail Stop ILS Correspondence relating to international patent
classification, exchanges and standards.
Mail Stop Issue Fee All communications following the receipt of a
PTOL-85, "Notice of Allowance and Fee(s)
Due," and prior to the issuance of a patent
should be addressed to Mail Stop Issue Fee,
unless advised to the contrary.
Assignments are the exception. Assignments
(with cover sheets) should be faxed to
571-273-0140, electronically submitted
(http://epas.uspto.gov), or submitted in a
separate envelope and sent to Mail Stop
Assignment Recordation Services,
Director - U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
as shown below.
Mail Stop L&R All documents pertaining to applications subject
to secrecy order pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 181, or
national-security classified and required to be
processed accordingly. Such papers, petitions for
foreign filing license pursuant to 37 CFR 5.12(b)
for which expedited handling is requested, and
petitions for retroactive license under 37 CFR
5.25 may also be hand carried to Licensing and
Review:
Technology Center 3600, Office of the Director
Room 4B41
501 Dulany Street (Knox Building)
Alexandria, VA 22314
Mail Stop Missing Requests for a corrected filing receipt and
Parts replies to OPAP notices such as the Notice
of Omitted Items, Notice to File Corrected
Application Papers, Notice of Incomplete
Application, Notice to Comply with Nucleotide
Sequence Requirements, and Notice to File Missing
Parts of Application, and associated papers and
fees.
Mail Stop MPEP Submissions concerning the Manual of Patent
Examining Procedure.
Mail Stop Patent Ext. Applications for patent term extension or
adjustment under 35 U.S.C. 154 and any
communications relating thereto. This mail stop
is limited to petitions for patent term extension
under 35 U.S.C. 154 for applications filed
between June 8, 1995 and May 29, 2000, and patent
term adjustment (PTA) under 35 U.S.C. 154 for
applications filed on or after May 29, 2000.
For applications for patent term extension under
35 U.S.C. 156, use Mail Stop Hatch-Waxman PTE.
For applications for patent term extension or
adjustment under 35 U.S.C. 154 that are mailed
together with the payment of the issue fee, use
Mail Stop Issue Fee.
Mail Stop Patent Submission of comments regarding search templates.
Search Template
Comments
Mail Stop PCT Mail related to international applications filed
under the Patent Cooperation Treaty in the
international phase and in the national phase
under 35 U.S.C. 371 prior to mailing of a
Notification of Acceptance of Application Under
35 U.S.C. 371 and 37 CFR 1.495 (Form
PCT/DO/EO/903).
Mail Stop Petition Petitions to be decided by the Office of Petitions,
including petitions to revive and petitions to
accept late payment of issue fees or maintenance
fees.
Mail Stop PGPUB Correspondence regarding publication of patent
applications not otherwise provided, including:
requests for early publication made after filing,
rescission of a non-publication request, corrected
patent application publication, and refund of
publication fee.
Mail Stop Post In patented files: requests for changes of
Issue correspondence address, powers of attorney,
revocations of powers of attorney, withdrawal as
attorney or agent and submissions under 37
CFR 1.501. Designation of, or changes to, a fee
address should be addressed to Mail Stop M
Correspondence. Requests for Certificate of
Correction need no special mail stop, but
should be mailed to the attention of Certificate
of Correction Branch.
Mail Stop RCE Requests for continued examination under
37 CFR 1.114.
Mail Stop Correspondence pertaining to the reconstruction
Reconstruction of lost patent files.
Mail Stop Ex Parte Original requests for Ex Parte Reexamination
Reexam and all subsequent corresponcence other
than correspondence to the Office of the Solicitor
(see 37 CFR 1.1(a)(3) and 1.302(c)).
Mail Stop Inter Original requests for Inter Partes Reexamination
Partes Reexam and all subsequent correspondence other than
correspondence to the Office of the Solicitor
(see 37 CFR 1.1(a)(3) and 1.302(c)).
Mail Stop Reissue All new and continuing reissue application filings.
Mail Stop Sequence Submission of the computer readable form (CRF) for
applications with sequence listings, when the CRF
is not being filed with the patent application.
Information for addressing trademark-related correspondence may also be found
on the USPTO's web site at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/mail.jsp.
MAIL TO BE DIRECTED TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR TRADEMARKS
Please address trademark-related correspondence to be delivered by the
United States Postal Service (USPS), except documents sent to the Assignment
Services Division for recordation, requests for copies of trademark
documents, and documents directed to the Madrid Processing Unit, as follows:
Commissioner for Trademarks
P.O. Box 1451
Alexandria, VA 22313-1451
Mail to be delivered by the USPS to the Office's Madrid Processing Unit,
must be mailed to:
Madrid Processing Unit
600 Dulany Street
MDE-7B87
Alexandria, VA 22314-5796
Mail to be delivered by the USPS to the Office's Deputy Commissioner for
Trademark Policy regarding Letters of Protest must be mailed to:
Letter of Protest
ATTN: Deputy Commissioner for Trademark Policy
600 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314-5796
Mail to be delivered by the USPS to the Director regarding the Fastener
Quality Act (FQA) must be mailed to:
Director, USPTO
ATTN: FQA
600 Dulany Street, MDE-10A71
Alexandria, VA 22314-5793
Mail to be delivered by the USPS to the Commissioner regarding the
recordal of a Native American Tribal Insignia (NATI) must be mailed to:
Native American Tribal Insignia
ATTN: Commissioner for Trademarks
600 Dulany Street
MDE-10A71
Alexandria, VA 22314-5793
Do NOT send any of the following via USPS certified mail or with a
"signature required" option: submissions to the Madrid Processing Unit,
Letters of Protest, applications for recordal of insignia under the
Fastener Quality Act, notifications of Native American Tribal Insignia.
Trademark-related mail to be delivered by hand or other private courier
or delivery service (e.g., UPS, Federal Express) to the Trademark Operation,
the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or the Office's Madrid Processing Unit,
must be delivered to:
Trademark Assistance Center
Madison East, Concourse Level Room C 55
600 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Information for addressing trademark-related correspondence may also be found
on the USPTO's web site at http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/mail.jsp.
MAIL TO BE DIRECTED TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES
PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
Please address mail to be directed to a mail stop identified below to
be delivered by the United States Postal Service (USPS) as follows (unless
otherwise instructed):
Mail Stop _____
Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Mail Stop
Designations Explanation
Mail Stop 3 Mail for the Office of Personnel from NFC.
Mail Stop 6 Mail for the Office of Procurement.
Mail Stop 8 All papers for the Office of the Solicitor.
Mail Stop 11 Mail for the Electronic Ordering Service (EOS).
Mail Stop 13 Mail for the Employee and Labor Relations Division.
Mail Stop 16 Mail related to refund requests, other than
requests for refund of a patent application
publication fee. Such requests should be directed
to Mail Stop PGPub.
Mail Stop 17 Invoices directed to the Office of Finance.
Mail Stop 24 Mail for the Inventor's Assistance Program,
including complaints about Invention Promoters.
Mail Stop 171 Vacancy Announcement Applications.
Mail Stop Assignment All assignment documents, security interests,
Recordation Services and other documents to be recorded in the
Assignment records. Note that documents with
cover sheets that are faxed to 571-273-0140 or
submitted electronically (http://epas.uspto.gov)
are processed much more quickly than those
submitted by mail.
Mail Stop Document All requests for certified or uncertified
Services copies of patent or trademark documents.
Mail Stop EEO Mail for the Office of Civil Rights.
Mail Stop External Mail for the Office of External Affairs.
Affairs
Mail Stop Interference Communications relating to interferences and
applications and patents involved in interference.
Mail Stop M Mail to designate or change a fee
Correspondence address, or other correspondence related to
maintenance fees, except payments of
maintenance fees in patents. See below for
the address for maintenance fee payments.
Mail Stop OED Mail for the Office of Enrollment and Discipline.
Maintenance Fee Payments
Unless submitted electronically over the Internet at www.uspto.gov, or by
facsimile, payments of maintenance fees in patents should be mailed through
the United States Postal Service.
Mailing address if paying with a check or money order:
United States Patent and Trademark Office
P.O. Box 979070
St. Louis, MO 63197-9000
Mailing address if paying by credit card or deposit account (or by hand-
delivery):
Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Attn.: Maintenance Fees
2051 Jamieson Avenue, Suite 300
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Information about the Maintenance Fee Branch may also be found on the
USPTO's web site at http://www.uspto.gov/about/offices/cfo/finance/receipts_
division.jsp.
Deposit Account Replenishments
To send payment to replenish deposit accounts, send the payments through
the United States Postal Service to:
United States Patent and Trademark Office
P.O. Box 979065
St. Louis, MO 63197-9000
Or
Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Attn.: Deposit Accounts
2051 Jamieson Avenue, Suite 300
Alexandria, VA 22314
Alternatively, deposit account replenishments (Attn: Deposit Accounts)
using hand-delivery and delivery by private courier (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.)
may be delivered to:
Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Attn.: Deposit Accounts
2051 Jamieson Avenue, Suite 300
Alexandria, VA 22314
Information abount deposit account replenishments may also be found on
the USPTO's web site at
http://www.uspto.gov/about/offices/cfo/finance/Deposit_Account_
Replenishments.jsp

ELECTRONIC OFFICIAL GAZETTE
of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
PATENTS
(eOG:P)

The Electronic Official Gazette of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office - Patents (eOG:P) provides the information in electronic format on CD-ROM.
The eOG:P is published every Tuesday and includes bibliographic information, a representative claim, and a drawing (if applicable) of each patent
issued that week. Patents are accessible by type of patent (utility, plant, etc.), classification (class or class/subclass), patentee name, and
geographical location. Links enable users to "jump" to a specific patent from these various indexes. The eOG:P is sold as an annual subscription
or as single copies.

Subscriptions are $430.00 per year, with single copies available for $20.00. For single copy purchases, please specify date and volume/issue number. Order
forms are available in MS Word® or Adobe® Acrobat® format.